alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


<Table>
<Caption>
                   NAME                            STATE OF INCORPORATION/ORGANIZATION
                   ----                            -----------------------------------
<S>                                                <C>
Odyssey HealthCare Holding Company                                DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Birmingham, Inc.                            DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Central Indiana, Inc.                       DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Central Texas, Inc.                         DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Michigan, Inc.                              DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Colorado, Inc.                              DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Georgia, Inc.                               DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Houston, Inc.                               DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Kansas City, Inc.                           DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Las Vegas, Inc.                             DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Milwaukee, Inc.                             DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Nashville, Inc.                             DE

Odyssey HealthCare of New Orleans, Inc.                           DE

Odyssey HealthCare of New Jersey, Inc.                            DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Oklahoma, Inc.                              DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Pennsylvania, Inc.                          DE

Odyssey HealthCare of Phoenix, Inc.                               DE

Odyssey HealthCare Operating A, LP                                DE

Odyssey HealthCare Operating B, LP                                DE

Odyssey HealthCare Management, LP                                 DE

Odyssey HealthCare GP, LLC                                        DE

Odyssey HealthCare LP, LLC                                        DE

Community Care Hospice, Inc.                                      TX

Hospice of Houston, L.P.                                          TX
</Table>
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 1 of 33

BLACKWATER SECURITY CONSULTING, LLC et al v. WESTCHESTER SURPLUS LINES INSURANCE COMPANY et al Doc. 52 Att. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 2 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 3 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 4 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 5 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 6 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 7 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 8 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 9 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 10 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 11 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 12 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 13 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 14 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 15 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 16 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 17 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 18 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 19 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 20 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 21 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 22 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 23 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 24 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 25 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 26 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 27 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 28 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 29 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 30 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 31 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 32 of 33
Case 2:05-cv-06020-PBT Document 52-4 Filed 07/11/2007 Page 33 of 33
Order entered February 10, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00011-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF S.Y., A CHILD

On Appeal from the 305th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 12-1206-X-305

ORDER

The Reporter’s Record is overdue in this parental termination case. In her notice of 

appeal, Mother states she is presumed indigent. Accordingly, we ORDER Pamela Sumler, 

Official Court Reporter for the 305th Judicial District Court, to file, within TEN DAYS, either 

(1) the reporter’s record; (2) written verification that appellant has not requested the record; or 

(3) written verification that a contest to the affidavit of indigency has been filed and sustained. 

Because this is a parental termination case, we remind both the trial court and Ms. Sumler 

that it is the responsibility of the Court Reporter to prepare, certify, and timely file the reporter’s 

record and that the trial court must direct Ms. Sumler to immediately commence the preparation 

of the reporter’s record. The trial court must arrange a substitute reporter if necessary. TEX. R.

APP. P. 28.4(b)(1).

We notify appellant that if we receive verification that no request for the record has been 

made, or that appellant, if not indigent, has not paid for the record, the appeal will be submitted 
without the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). Appellant’s brief will be due 

TWENTY DAYS after the reporter’s record is filed or we receive notice that no request or no 

payment for the record has been made.

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send copies of this order, by electronic 

transmission, to the following persons:

Honorable Cheryl C. Lee-Shannon

Presiding Judge of the 305th Judicial District Court

Pamela Sumler

Official Court Reporter, 305th Judicial District Court

/s/ ADA BROWN 

JUSTICE
#### UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Michael J. CROSBY, Appellant.

No. 89-5450.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Feb. 17, 1993.

On the court’s own motion the opinion of October 16, 1990, 917 F.2d 362, and judgment of September 30, 1991, 951 F.2d 357, are hereby vacated. The mandate of this court issued October 2, 1991, is recalled.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                      ANNUITY AND LIFE RE (HOLDINGS), LTD.

            STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE
                                   UNAUDITED
         (EXPRESSED IN UNITED STATES DOLLARS EXCEPT FOR SHARE AMOUNTS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                          THREE MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,     SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30,
                                          ----------------------------    --------------------------
                                              2000            1999           2000           1999
                                          ------------    ------------    -----------    -----------
<S>                                       <C>             <C>             <C>            <C>
Net Income..............................   $7,822,293      $8,746,242     $15,636,061    $17,228,523
Net average number of common
  shareholders outstanding..............   25,499,999      25,499,999      25,499,999     25,499,999
Weighted average number of common shares
  outstanding including shares issuable
  from exercise of options and
  warrants..............................   27,311,063      27,114,771      27,366,408     27,148,654
Earnings per share......................   $     0.31      $     0.34     $      0.61    $      0.68
Earnings per share assuming dilution....   $     0.29      $     0.32     $      0.57    $      0.63
</TABLE>

                                       17
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                          47,273
<SECURITIES>                                   237,667
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,544,562
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               379,901
<PP&E>                                          48,271
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,466,487
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          368,240
<BONDS>                                        112,505
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,580
<OTHER-SE>                                     328,193
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,466,487
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               749,370
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               736,886
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,484
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (4,494)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,990
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,990
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .64<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61<F1>
<FN>
<F1>Earning per share amounts represent Basic and Diluted as prescribed by SFAS
128.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
No. 46081.

#### Protests 995791-G, etc., of Charles Pettinos (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise consists of amorphous graphite similar to that the subject of *Starkey*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 118, C. D. 444). The claim at 10 percent under paragraph 213 was therefore sustained.
OSWER/OSRTI Washington, DC 20460


## N ATIONAL 

## P RIORITIES 

## L IST 

## (NPL)
***Proposed Site*** May 2013 

### GARDEN CITY GROUND W ATER Garden City, Indiana PLUME Bartholomew County

 **Site Location :**  The Garden City Ground Water Plume is located in the unincorporated town of Garden City in Bartholomew Count y, Indiana, approximately one mile south of the city of Columbus. Garden City is in the flood plain of the east fork of the White River. The Garden City Ground Water Plume has affected residential and commercial drinking water wells and covers approximately 3.4 acres

.

 **Site History:** Since 1990, drinking water wells in Garden City have had intermittent trichloroethene (TCE) contamination, which has sometimes exceeded drinking water standards. Despite several investigations in the area, the origin of the T CE is unknown.

 **Site Contamination/Contaminants:** The ground water plume consists of TCE.

 **Potential Impacts on Surrounding Community/Environment:** The town includes approximately 50 i ndividual residences and a mobile home park. Garden City residential wells obtain drinking water from one common aquifer. All the residences, mobile homes and businesses in Garden City that are served by private ground water wells may be affected by the TCE plume

.
 **Response Activities (to date):** The Indiana Department o f Environmental Management supplies and maintains carbon filtration systems on t hree residential wells. Attempts to establish a water line main system in Garden City have not been financially feasible

.

 **Need for NPL Listing:**
The s tate of Indiana referre d the site to the EPA because the site requires a long

- term response and action and listing will allow for a proper and timely investigation of the nature and extent of contamination

. Other federal and state cleanup programs were evaluated , but are not via ble at this time

. The EPA received a letter of support for placing the site on the NPL from the state of Indiana.

[The description of the site (release) is based on information available at the time the site was evaluated with the HRS. The description may change as additional information is gathered on the sources and extent of contamination. See 56 FR 5600, February 11, 1991, or subsequent FR notices.]

For more information about the hazardous substances identified in this narrative summary, including general information regarding the effects of exposure to these substances on human health, please see the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) ToxFAQs. ATSDR ToxFAQs can be found on the Internet at http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/index.asp or by telephone at 1

- 888

- 42

- ATSDR or 1

- 888

- 422

- 8737.
VOLUME 3

APPENDIX C

FIELD DATA

c.1 TED FIELD DATA

c.2 SED FIELD DATA

C.3 METEOROLOGICAL DATA

C.4 ON-SITE GC/MS REPORT AND DATA
No. 60018.

#### A. N. Deringer, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 173112-K, etc. (Ogdensburg).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef or veal similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

712 TP 12-00139 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF SURF CITY ENTERPRISES OF SYRACUSE, INC., PETITIONER,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, RESPONDENT.

SCICCHITANO & PINSKY, PLLC, SYRACUSE (BRADLEY M. PINSKY OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER.

MARK D. FRERING, NEW YORK STATE LIQUOR AUTHORITY, ALBANY, FOR RESPONDENT.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department by order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County [Brian F. DeJoseph, J.], entered January 11, 2012) to review a determination of respondent. The determination imposed a civil penalty against petitioner.

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed.

Memorandum: Petitioner commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding seeking to annul the determination that it violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) (selling alcohol to minors), 9 NYCRR 48.2 (conduct of licensed premises) and 9 NYCRR 48.3 (conformance with local and other regulations). Contrary to the contention of petitioner, we conclude that the determination that it violated Alcoholic Beverage Control Law § 65 (1) and 9 NYCRR 48.2 is supported by substantial evidence ( see generally Matter of Shorts Bar of Rochester Inc. v New York State Liq. Auth ., 17 AD3d 1101, 1102). Several law enforcement officers who participated in the raid of petitioner’s establishment testified at the hearing that they observed numerous underage patrons consuming alcohol, and the record includes several supporting depositions of underage patrons who admitted consuming alcohol on the premises ( see Matter of JMH, Inc. v New York State Liq. Auth. , 61 AD3d 1260, 1262). We do not address petitioner’s contention that the admissions were obtained in violation of the patrons’ constitutional rights inasmuch as petitioner lacks standing to raise that contention ( cf. People v Wesley , 73 NY2d 351, 355; see generally Warth v Seldin , 422 US 490, 498-500; Tileston v Ullman , 318 US 44, 46).-2- 712 TP 12-00139

We further conclude that the determination that petitioner violated 9 NYCRR 48.3 by employing unlicensed security guards in violation of state regulations is supported by substantial evidence ( see generally Shorts Bar of Rochester , 17 AD3d at 1102). Petitioner’s contention with respect to that charge concerns the resolution of conflicting testimony, and it is well established that the findings of an Administrative Law Judge that turn on the credibility of witnesses are entitled to great weight ( see Matter of Grossberg v Christian
, 245 AD2d 118; see also Matter of Café La China Corp. v New York State Liq. Auth. , 43 AD3d 280, 281). We see no basis to disturb those findings.

Entered: June 8, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1 The action was dismissed for failure to state a cognizable federal claim and the court

declined to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over plaintiff’s state claims. Plaintiff’s amended

complaint, filed on July 26, 2005, raises the same medical care claims set forth in his original

complaint.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

FREDERICK J. GATLIN,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-0603 GEB DAD P

vs.

DR. PACIFICO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On July 26, 2005, plaintiff filed an amended complaint in this action. On July 27,

2005 plaintiff filed a request for the appointment of counsel. This civil rights action was closed

on March 30, 2005.1 Plaintiff is advised that documents filed after the action was closed will be

disregarded and that no further orders will issue in response to future filings. 

DATED: September 2, 2005.

DAD:4

gatl0603.58

Case 2:04-cv-00603-GEB-DAD Document 13 Filed 09/06/05 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET, AND THE
SUMMARY OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY CONTAINED IN THE ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K TO
WHICH THIS EXHIBIT IS ATTACHED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL SCHEDULES.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  258,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                    17,100
<INVENTORY>                                    585,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               842,600
<PP&E>                                       2,015,500
<DEPRECIATION>                                  46,800
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,109,500
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          516,000
<BONDS>                                        971,400
<COMMON>                                       320,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     90,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       (800)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,109,500
<SALES>                                      2,382,500
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,385,400
<CGS>                                        2,227,300
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,229,600
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              63,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 38,500
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,100
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,100
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<Page>

                                                                   Exhibit 99.1


                            CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

   The undersigned, Eleanor L. Thomas, President (chief executive officer) of
the managing owner, Prudential Securities Futures Management Inc. (the
"Managing Owner"), of World Monitor Trust--Series C ("Series C"), hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

   (1) Series C's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending
   June 28, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
   date hereof (the "Quarterly Report"), fully complies with the requirements
   of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

   (2) The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
   all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
   Series C.


/s/ Eleanor L. Thomas
_________________________
Eleanor L. Thomas
President (chief executive officer) of the Managing Owner
August 12, 2002



   The undersigned, Steven Weinreb, Chief Financial Officer of the managing
owner, the Managing Owner, of Series C, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that:

   (1) Series C's Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of
   Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

   (2) The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in
   all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
   Series C.


/s/ Steven Weinreb
_________________________
Steven Weinreb
Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner
August 12, 2002
**Exhibit
      32.2**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO** **18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350,** **AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO** **SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**




In
      connection with the Annual Report of Javelin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Douglas
      A. Hamilton, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer, certify,
      pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act, that:


(1) The
      report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and


(2)  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.




/s/
      Douglas A. Hamilton





Douglas
      A. Hamilton


Chief
      Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer





April
      14,
      2006








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Javelin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Javelin Pharmaceuticals,
      Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
      request
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT		&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2022 ReportingSection VII

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2022-10	&"Arial,Bold"VII ESR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"March 2022